Near Well-bore Condition (Skin)

Chapter 5 (Petroleum Production Systems by Economides)

Dr. Ajay Suri

Associate Professor
Dept. of Petroleum Engineering
IIT (ISM) Dhanbad
1
Outline
• Introduction
• Skin Definition
• Causes
• Hawkins’ formula
• Components
• Skin from Partial completion and Slant
• Skin from Well Perforation
• Skin Around Horizontal Wells
• Identification
• Remedy
2
Introduction
Steady State Pressure Profile Around a Vertical Producer

Since flow is getting Ln dependence

constricted near the means near
wellbore, the wellbore condition
pressure drop should has more impact
increase 3
Skin Definition
• Qualitatively the near wellbore region with altered perm is called as
the skin.

• Quantitatively introduced by Van Everdingen & Hurst (1949) as the

additional steady-state pressure drop (Dps) near the wellbore:

qm Skin factor
Dps = s (dimensionless)
2p kh
Note the pressure drop changes with the flow rate and the viscosity for
the same perm alteration (skin factor). k is the undamaged permeability. 4
Skin Added to the Radial Flow Equation
• Skin or skin factor (s) is dimensionless and is
analogous to film coefficient in heat transfer
• Non dimensionalizing is done similar to PD function
done in well testing
• It can then be added to the radial flow equation as
shown below

= p - pwf ,ideal + pwf ,ideal - pwf = p - pwf ,ideal + DPs 5

Radial Flow Steady-State Equation with Skin in Field Units
• In US oilfield units,

• pe, pressure at outer boundary, psi

• pwf, pressure at wellbore, psi
• q, flow rate at std. conditions, stb/day
• B, formation volume factor, RB/STB
• m = oil viscosity, cp
• k = reservoir permeability, md
• h = pay thickness, ft
• re = drainage radius, ft
• rw = wellbore radius, ft
• S = skin factor
6
Positive Skin Causes
1. Plugging of pores by solids from drilling,
completion, stimulation, injection, workover
2. Mechanical crushing or disaggregation of porous
media, ex. fines plugging
3. Formation of emulsions
4. Wettability changes
5. Reduction of relative perm to oil due to increase of
water or gas saturation
6. Partial completion or inadequate perforations
7. Turbulence
8. Growth of bacteria in-situ
7
Negative Skin Causes
1. Increased near wellbore permeability due to
a. Matrix stimulation
b. Hydraulic fracturing
2. Highly inclined wellbore or a horizontal wellbore

8
Effective Wellbore Radius of Well with Skin
• With simple rearrangement of s to ln(es)

• Effective wellbore radius becomes

+ skin decreases the effective rw

- skin increases the effective rw
9
10
11
Near Wellbore Damaged Zone

12
Bottom-hole pressures (with and w/o skin)
Reduced perm zone Unaltered perm zone

Dps
Dps = pwf ,ideal - pwf ,real

13
Hawkins’ (1956) Formula
• Calculates skin for a given depth of damaged zone
with reduced perm
• For pwf,ideal

• For pwf,real

14
Hawkins’ (1956) Formula
• Difference pwf,ideal – pwf,real = Dps, which is equal to

• Perm impairment (ks) has a more impact than the

depth of damage (rs as it ln)
15
16
Conclusion from Example 5-1
• Permeability impairment has much larger effect on skin than depth of
damage
• Except for a phase change-dependent skin, 61 ft of damage depth is
highly unlikely
• Skin derived from well tests (5-20) are likely from permeability
impairment near the well
• Important for design of matrix stimulation

17
Plugging due to Solids
• Most common
• Sources
• Solids from the wellbore fluids (mostly during drilling) and
some could come during completion, although completion
fluids are typically solids free)
• Dispersion of clays present in the rock
• Precipitation of minerals in solution
• Growth of bacteria aggregates

18
SEM of a Fontainebleau sandstone rock sample. Institut
Francais du Petrole. Grain 200 mm, surface roughness 1 mm

19
20
Particle Entrapment &
Perm Reduction
(Schechter, 1992)

• Surface deposition of
particles
• Reduced porosity
• Increased surface area
• Increases tortuosity
• Internal Pore blockage
• External filter cake

21
Capillary Model for Porous Medium
• Imagine N bundle of capillaries of equal length but
different x-sectional area in unit bulk volume
• Suppose there are n, no. of capillaries with area
between A & A+dA
• The number of capillaries, n, with area between A and
A+dA is calculated as hdA where h is known as
distribution or density function.

22
Capillary Model for Porous Medium (cont.)
• If l is the pore length, lA will be the pore volume of a
capillary with area A
• Pore volume of n capillaries with area between A and
A+dA equals lA*n = lA*hdA
• Pore volume of all capillaries -> summing pore volume
of capillaries of area between 0 and dx, then dx and
2dx & so on until infinity

f = l ò Ah dA Since Bulk volume = 1

0
23
Capillary Model for Porous Medium (cont.)
• For k, we know DP is same across all tubes
• Average velocity in a tube is proportional to square of
its radius (A/pi)
• Flow rate in a tube is proportional to it’s area times
velocity, vA, A2/pi

Hagen-Poiseuille
equation for flow in a
capillary/tube/pipe

24
Capillary Model for Porous Medium (cont.)
• Flow rate from tubes with area between A & A+dA =
c1vAhdA = c2A2hdA
• Total flow rate from all the capillaries is
¥

q = c2 ò A h dA
2

0
• Applying Darcy’s law to this bundle of capillary model
(Ab is the bulk area = some constant as Ab*l=1)

kAb
q= DP = ck
mL
25
Capillary Model for Porous Medium (cont.)
• Equating the two models and calculating k, we get
¥

k = c3 ò A h dA
2

26
27
28
 Conservation Equation for Particle Transport in Porous Media
Continuity equation which states

Derived from continuity equation applicable to any conserved quantity (mass, energy, momentum, charge)
The above Convective-Diffusive equation is similar to Boltzmann transport (statistical behavior of thermodynamic
systems not in equilibrium) and Navier-Stokes equation (motion of viscous fluids)
Continuity equation
Quantity can be concentration, density, temperature
u = Darcy velocity
quantity/volume Flux = qt./area/time
c = Concentration of particles/solids (solid volume / fluid volume)
 = Porosity
 = Concentration of deposited particles (volume of deposited particles / bulk volume) Generation of
qt./vol/time
D = Dispersion Coefficient
29
Reasonable Approximations
• Incompressible flow (both fluids and solids)
• Dispersion is negligible
• Concentration of solids is assumed to be low
• Deposition follows a relation as proposed by Iwasaki (1937) ds
= luc
dt

• Using the above approximations and relation we get

• At steady state the equation becomes

30
Concentration of Suspended Particles in the
Formation (Linear Geometry)

fx
c(x,t) = 0 t<
u
fx
c(x,t) = cin exp(-l x) t>
u

s (x,t) = lutcin exp(-l x) t  1 PV

 ( x, t )   0   ( x, t )

31
Example Particle Concentration & Permeability
Profile Around the Well

32
 Permeability Reduction Model
Pang and Sharma

Developed from Kozeny-Carman equation, f3 1 1

k=K
Perm Reduction is calculated from its 3 (1- f )2 S gv 2 t
components
k / ko = kdp kds kdt

2
é ù
ê 1+ s / (1- f ) ú
æ f 3 (1- fo )2 ö kds = ê o ú æ 1 ö
kdp = ç 3 ê s ú kdt = ç
2÷
è fo (1- f ) ø ê 1+
f
(d g
/ d )
p ú è 1+ bs ÷ø
ë (1- o
) û
Perm reduction Perm reduction due to Perm reduction due to
due to porosity increase in surface area increase in tortuosity
reduction
33
Filtration Coefficient () Using Trajectory Analysis (Rajagopalan and Tien,
1976)

• Happel’s sphere in-cell model for representing the porous media

• Forces considered on a particle are due to
• Convection
• Gravity
• Buoyancy
• Diffusion
• Favorable/attractive surface interactions
• Particle can be trapped due to interception, diffusion &
sedimentation
• Particle-Particle interaction is neglected
34
 Happel’s Sphere-in-cell Model (1958)
cin - cout h = (1- f ) AS N + 3.375´10 (1- f ) AS N G N R -0.4 + 4AS 1/3 N PE -2/3
-3 1.2
2/3 1/8
N 15/8 2/3
h= LO R
cin Flow

3(1- f )
l= h Rajagopalan & Tien
(b,S)

Liquid 2d g (1976)
Shell (r,)
Grain

2rP 2 ( r P - r f )g dp
Pore
dg NG = NR =
throat
diameter b Limiting trajectory
9um dg
(dth)

(ap+ac , ) H ud g
N LO = N PE =
9pmrP 2u DBM
h is the efficiency of the grain, cin and cout are
35
the conc. of particles at inlet and outlet
Filtration Coefficient Model
(Compared to 106 Experiments)
13 Researchers

10000
Sakthivadivel Roque et al
Iwasaki (1995)
(1966) Exp
(1937) Exp:92-93
Exp:24-25
Exp:1-10 RT Model
Eliassen
1000 (1941 )
Exp:11 Fox, Cleasby Gruesbeck & Kau et al
(1966) Collins (1995)
Mackrle
Exp:26-27 (1982) Exp:94-97
(1960)
Exp:12-13 Ives Exp:88-91
100 (1967) Ison
Maroudas (1967)
Filtration Coefficient (1/m)

Exp:28-40
(1961) Exp:41-64
Exp:14-23 Fitzpatrick
(1973) Close et al
10 Exp:65-87 (2005)
Exp:98-106

0.1

0.01

0.001
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
36
Experiment No.
Formation of Internal & External Filter Cake
(A Multi-Component Filtration Model, Suri et al., SPEJ, March 2004)
Mud particles
Dh1, k1,dg1

Dh2, k2,dg2

Depth of
damage

Formation
grains

37
Simulator: UTDAMAGE (Suri et al.)

38
UTDAMAGE: Output Windows (Suri et al.)

39
Fines Mobilization
• Due to change in chemical composition of water
(reduced salinity or ions between the formation water
and filtrate)
• Due to shear forces applied by moving fluid
• Sources of filtrate
• Drilling fluids
• Completion fluids
• Stimulation fluids
• Injection fluids
• Essential to check filtrate compatibility with the
formation
40
Electrical Double Layer

41
Dispersion of Clay Particles
• Sudden decrease in salinity in sandstone may cause dispersion of clay
particles (called water sensitivity)
• Depends on cation type, pH, rate of salinity change

42
43
Critical Salt Concentrations in Filtrate for
Minimum Damage (Schechter)

44
Prevent of Clay Dispersion
• A critical salt concentration is typically recommended
• A minimal conc. of a monovalent ions for ex. as given for Berea SS and
a sufficient fraction of divalent ions should be present
• A common criteria is to have 2 wt % of KCl and at least 1/10th of salt is
should be divalent cations

45
Chemical Precipitation
• Precipitation of solids from brine or crude can cause severe plugging
• Triggers are change in temp., pressure, or composition alteration of
the phases
• Precipitates can be organic or inorganic
• Inorganic precipitates are usually divalent ions such as Ca2+, Ba2+
combined with carbonate or sulphate ions

46
Inorganic Precipitation Example

• Initially the reaction is in equilibrium

• Any increase in the species in the left or any decrease in the species in
the right will form more CaCO3 (solid/precipitate)
• Ex. injecting more CaCl2, or HCO3- or liberation of CO2 due to pressure
reduction (Prudhoe Bay has HCO3- richness and this problem)

47
Organic Precipitation Example
• Organic precipitation are waxes and asphaltenes
• Wax (paraffins) precipitates when temp. is reduced or
when oil composition changes due to gas liberation
• Asphaltenes (aromatic and napthenes) are colloidally
dispersed in the crude and are stable due to presence
of resins
• If resin conc. is reduced, asphaltenes can flocculate
causing damage

48
Fluid Damage: Emulsions, Rel Perm, Wettability
• Changes in the formation oil can cause
• Increase in apparent viscosity (emulsification)
• Decrease in effective perm (water block)
• Water-in-oil emulsions have
• Order of magnitude higher than oil viscosity
• Yield stress to be overcome to flow
• Typically caused by mechanical mixing dispersing one
phase into another but in formation
• Likely formed by surfactants or fines stabilizing small
droplets

49
Water Damage
• Increase in water saturation around the wellbore (also
called as water block) results in reduction in effective
perm to oil

50
Wettability Damage
• Certain chemicals can alter the wettability from
water-wet to oil-wet
• This would reduce the oil perm greatly

51
Perforation Damage (Kruger, 1986)
• Damage near perforations is unavoidable

Lab testing of
perforating into
sandstone cores
showed
damaged zone to
be 1/4-1/2 inch
thick with perm
of 7-20% of
undamaged
perm
52
Mechanical Damage
• Collapse of weak formation around wellbore
• In friable formations
• In formations weakened by acidizing

53
Biological Damage
• Particularly water injection wells are susceptible to
bacteria (particularly anaerobic that grows rapidly)
• Using these bacteria to plug the thief zones is studied
for EOR
• Bactericides should be used for prevention

54
Damage during Well Operations
• Drilling Damage
• Completion Damage
• Production Damage
• Injection Damage

55
Drilling Damage
• Invasion of drilling fluid particles and filtrate
• Particle damage is more severe typically
• Depth of invasion is typically an inch to a max of 1 ft
• Correctly sized particles invaded less deep
• Perm recovery is around 70-80% for correctly sized
drilling fluids
• Rule of thumb, 5 vol% particles should have diameter
> 1/3rd of mean pore size

56
Drilling Damage (cont.)
• Perforations or acids typically overcome drilling damage
• Filter cake grows after sudden sport loss
• Filter cake reduces the rate of filtrate loss, common filtrate
depths are 1-6 ft
• Filter cake is eroded by the shear force of drilling fluid

• uf is filtrate flux, C is dynamic fluid loss coefficient of the filter

cake, t is the exposure time (hrs.), b is a const. for mechanical
stability of cake, g with a dot is shear rate (1/s)
57
Drilling Damage (cont.)
• Hassan (1980) reports b: 2-50 x 10-8 cm3/cm2
• Horizontal wells poses penetration of filtrate invasion
because of long exposures to drilling fluids
• Filtrate can cause
• Fines mobilization
• Precipitation of solids
• Water blocking

58
59
60
61
Drilling Damage (cont.)
• Filtrate damage can be reduced by tailoring ionic
composition compatible with formation water
• If water blocking or clay swelling can be a serious
problem water-based muds have to avoided

62
Completion Damage
• Completion fluids
• Cements
• Perforating fluids
• Stimulation fluids
• Similar solids and filtrate invasion as drilling fluid
• Typically solids should be < 2 ppm with size < 2 mm
• Cements have high Ca2+, so potential for precipitation

63
Underbalance needed to minimize perforation damage in
gas zones based on its perm (King et al., 1985)

64
Underbalance needed to minimize perforation damage in
oil zones based on its perm (King et al., 1985)

65
Stimulation Damage
• Stimulation fluids
• Similar solids and filtrate invasion as drilling and
completion fluids causing solids plugging and
precipitation

66
Production Damage
• Fines are mobilized due to
• high velocity (critical velocity, Schechter, 1992)
• If they are water-wet and when water production starts

67
Production Damage
• Precipitation of solids (similar to before)
• Inorganic minerals from brine
• Organic solids from crude
• Occasional stimulation can be done
• acids for carbonate precipitates
• solvents for waxes
• Chemicals can be squeezed for prevention

68
Injection Damage
• Suspended solids in injection fluids
• Typically suspended solids size is kept < 2 mm
• Precipitation due to incompatibility issues
• Injection of sulfate or carbonate when Ca2+, Mg2+, or Ba2+ is
present
• Cation exchange with clays can release divalent cations and
cause precipitation even when injection water is
compatible
• Growth of bacteria
• Bactericide should be added

69
Skin Components

• sd = damage skin
• sc+ = skin due to partial completion and slant
• sp = perforation skin
• spseudo = Rate dependent & phase skins

70
Rate Dependent Skin
• Well tests done at different rates can isolate non-rate dependent skin

At high rates rate

dependent skin Dq can
be much larger than s

71
Phase Skin
• Producing below bubble point point leads to gas evolution &
reduction in effective perm to oil
• When the well is shut-in the gas re-enters the solution
• Similarly gas retrograde condensate will lead to liquid drop around
the gas well causing effective perm to gas to reduce
• When the well is shut-in, or the pressure is increased, much of the liquid will
not re-enter the gas (Fussell, 1973; Cvetkovic et al., 1990)
• Natural gas needs to be injected that may dissolve the condensate (Huff &
Puff operation can be repeated periodically)
• Perforating, acidizing and fracking will alter most pre-treatment skins

72
Skin from Partial Completion (sc)
• Frequently, wells are partially completed
(open well height < total reservoir height)
• If completed interval > 75% of total, sc is
negligible
• Also referred to as partial penetration
• Can be a result of a bad perf job
• Can be deliberate to retard or avoid coning
• Generates early time spherical flow which
allows calculating vertical permeability

73
Skin from Slant (s)
• While partial completion reduces the area of
contact (hence +skin), slant well, increases the
area of contact (hence –skin)
• Combined skin is sc+
• Cinco-Ley et al. (1975) calculated sc+ semi-
analytically & presented tables for various
combinations: h/rw, zw/h, hw/h, 
• hD = h/rw is dimensionless reservoir thickness
• Elevation ratio (zw/h), zw is elevation of mid of
perfs & completion ratio (hw/h)

74
75
small

76
Higher
than for
hD=100
(sc~21)

77
78
Perforating
• Perforating guns are attached to wireline, coiled
tubing, or tubing
• Shaped charges arranged helically for good perf
density and small angle between adjoining perfs.
(phasing)
• Cable head connects string to wireline/tubing and
provides a weak point to break if problem arises
• Corelation device ensures right depth by locating
casing collars and matching with previous logs
• Positioning device orients shots for optimum
geometry
79
Perforating (cont.)
• Shaped charges consist of a case, explosive and a
liner
• Electric current initiates the detonation
• Perforations with diameter 0.25 – 0.4 in. and a
tunnel between 6-12 inches typically created
• Usually done underbalance for immediate
flowback carrying debris resulting in a cleaner perf
• Dimensions, number, and phasing have a
controlling role in well performance

80
Perforation Skin (sp)
• Karakas & Tariq (1988) calculated
perforation skin semi-analytically
• Divided the skin into components

• sH, plane flow effect

• sV, vertical converging effect
• swb, wellbore effect
• rw, rperf, lperf, hperf, Inverse of shots
per foot = 1/hperf
81
Plane Flow Effect (Calculation of sH)

• rw() with an apostrophe is the effective wellbore radius and is a

function of phasing angle, 

• Constant a depends on perforation phasing & is obtained from table

82
sH 83
Vertical Converging Effect (Calculation of sV)

• kH and kV are horizontal and vertical permeabilities

• Constant a1, a2, b1, b2 are also functions of phasing as given in the
table, sV is the potentially the largest contributor, for ex. for low spf

84
Wellbore Effect (Calculation of swb)

• Constants c1 and c2 are in the table

85
86
87
88
89
90
Near Well Damage and Perforation Skin
Combined
• Karakas and Tariq (1988) also showed that near well damage & perf.
can be combined

• If lperf < rs (perforations terminate within the damage zone)

• (sd)o is open-hole equivalent skin given by Hawkin’s formula

91
Near Well Damage and Perforation Skin
Combined (cont.)
• If perforations terminate outside the damage zone

• sp with an apostrophe is evaluated at a modified perf length lperf and a

modified radius rw both with an apostrophe

92
 Horizontal Well Production Model (Joshi)
Excellent producers for reservoirs with
thickness < 50 ft or with good vertical
permeability
Also needed in tight reservoirs and shale
reservoirs for larger access & fracking

a is the half of the major axis of

the drained ellipsoid
93
Horizontal Well Damage Skin (Joshi,
Economides et al.)
• Mixed steady state production from a horizontal well with skin is

94
 Horizontal Well Damage Shape (Frick &
Economides, 1991)
• Described the shape of damage along and normal to a horizontal well
Damage is highest near the
aH,max is the maximum damage depth along
vertical section due to higher
the horizontal near the vertical section cone
residence time and almost
zero at the tip

Truncated cone approaching

zero 95
Horizontal Well Damage Skin
• Skin effect is analogous to Hawkin’s formula for a vertical well

• Above equations assumes no damage at the horizontal well end

• Acidizing of horizontal wells is more involved than vertical well
• Larger volumes required, placement is difficult (uses CT, zonal
isolation, leaving collar of damage or deliberate undercompletion)
96
Horizontal Well Damage Skin (cont.)
• If a collar of damage with a large
axis of damage, asH,max is left
surrounding a zone of stimulation
with axis of aiH,max then skin is
• ki is the stimulated perm
• Shape of stimulation same as
shape of damage
• Likely for sandstone reservoirs
• For carbonates, stimulation shape
follows rxn kinetics and not flow
97
Horizontal Well Damage Skin in Carbonates
• Assuming cylindrical shape (ri,max) for the stimulated zone while
elliptical shape for the damage zone, skin is calculated as followed:

98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109